A Theological and Historical Rebuke of the Statement on Christian Nationalism & the Gospel
In the corner of the stone cellar, a candle flickered low, casting long shadows across the faces of the Martín family. Twelve-year-old Mateo clutched his mother’s hand as muffled boots echoed down the alleyway. His father, once a respected merchant and devout follower of Christ, now whispered prayers in Latin and Castilian, hoping the Inquisition’s agents would pass them by. They were not Jews, nor Muslims—but neither were they Catholic enough. Their quiet rejection of papal authority and insistence on sola scriptura had drawn suspicion. In 1490s Spain, a simple accusation of such a position was enough.
Under Ferdinand II and Isabella I, the Spanish Inquisition—established in 1478—became a machinery of terror. While its most infamous targets were Jews and Muslims, many non-Catholic Christians also suffered. Anyone who questioned Rome’s authority, adopted reformist ideas (yes, reformed theology existed before Luther), or worshipped outside sanctioned liturgy was accused of heresy. The inquisitors, led by Tomás de Torquemada, wielded anonymous denunciations and coerced confessions like weapons. Families were torn apart, communities scattered, and the gospel, meant to bring freedom, was shackled by state power.
This historical crucible reveals the danger of conflating national identity with religious orthodoxy. What began as a campaign to unify Spain under Catholic doctrine devolved into a regime that persecuted not only Jews and Muslims, but also Christians who refused to conform. The expulsion of Jews in 1492 was only one chapter in a broader story of religious coercion that should caution modern movements like Christian Nationalism.
What Christian Nationalism Claims
At the core of the Statement on Christian Nationalism & the Gospel lies Article II, which posits that nations are commanded to honor God by officially affirming the orthodox Christian faith as historically defined in creeds, such as the Nicene or Apostles’ Creeds. To present the strongest interpretation of this idea, one must recognize its proponents’ intent to align civil governance with divine truth. Advocates argue that, just as individuals and churches are called to uphold sound doctrine (Jude 3: “contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all time handed down to the saints”), nations, as collective entities under Christ’s lordship (Colossians 1:15-18), should publicly acknowledge core Christian tenets to glorify God and promote societal flourishing.
According to them, this affirmation could promote moral coherence by drawing on denominational confessions without being sectarian, and reinforce salvation through faith alone in Christ, as revealed in Scripture, for God’s glory alone. In this perspective, such a mandate is not seen as coercive, but rather as a fulfillment of the Great Commission (Matthew 28:19-20), extending discipleship to national structures and ensuring governance aligns with God’s eternal standards.
The Entire Counsel of God
Upon closer examination of Scripture, Article II’s central claim, that nations are commanded to officially affirm orthodox Christian creeds, lacks both textual foundation and apostolic precedent. The verses often cited in support of this idea, such as Acts 20:27 (“I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole purpose of God”) and 1 Corinthians 15:1–5 (Paul’s summary of the gospel), are directed to believers within the ecclesial community. These passages emphasize doctrinal fidelity among the saints, not civil mandates imposed upon governments. The creeds themselves—such as the Nicene Creed (AD 325) and the Apostles’ Creed—are post-biblical formulations developed to clarify theological disputes within the church, not prescriptions for national policy.
The Book of Acts, which chronicles the earliest expressions of Christian witness, offers no example of the apostles seeking governmental endorsement of doctrine. In Acts 17:22–31, Paul addresses the Athenian Areopagus with philosophical and theological clarity, calling individuals to repentance and faith in the risen Christ. He does not demand that Athens adopt a creed or legislate Christian belief. Similarly, in Acts 4:18–20, when Peter and John are commanded by religious authorities to cease preaching, they respond with spiritual conviction, not political activism, saying, “We cannot stop speaking about what we have seen and heard.” The early church operated under pagan Roman rule, often persecuted, yet it flourished through evangelism, communal worship, and sacrificial love (Acts 2:42–47). There is no biblical precedent for aligning the gospel with state power.
Only One Holy Nation
Moreover, the concept of a “holy nation” is consistently applied to Israel in the Old Testament, not to Gentile governments or modern states. Exodus 19:6 declares to the Israelites, “You shall be to Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.” This covenantal identity is specific, conditional, and tied to the Mosaic law. In the New Testament, 1 Peter 2:9 reinterprets this language spiritually, applying it to the church: “But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God’s own possession.” This is not a geopolitical entity but a spiritual community drawn from every tribe and tongue. The church, not any modern nation-state, is the holy nation under Christ’s lordship.
Jesus himself decisively separates his kingdom from earthly governance. In John 18:36, he tells Pilate, “My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, My servants would be fighting.” This statement is not metaphorical; it is a theological declaration that Christ’s reign is spiritual, transcendent, and not dependent on political structures. His refusal to incite rebellion or seek civil endorsement underscores the nature of his mission: to transform hearts, not legislate belief. The Great Commission (Matthew 28:19–20) calls the church to make disciples of all nations—not to disciple the nations themselves as political entities, but to reach individuals within them.
To conflate national identity with creedal affirmation is to misread the scope and method of Christ’s kingdom. Article II’s vision, though perhaps well-intentioned, risks repeating the errors of Christendom, where coercion replaced conviction, and state power diluted gospel purity. Scripture offers no command for governments to adopt creeds, only for the church to proclaim Christ faithfully. The kingdom of God advances not through legislation, but through love, truth, and the Spirit’s work in human hearts.
Patriotism is Not Nationalism
By equating Christian Nationalism with mere patriotism, people overlook its profound dangers, mistaking a call for national moral renewal with an ideology that risks replacing the Holy Spirit’s role in conviction and transformation (John 16:8–11) with state-enforced religion. As shown in Article II, the true evil of this movement lies in its potential to erode religious liberty and coerce conformity, thereby alienating seekers from the gospel’s grace. In the United States, Christian Nationalism is already harming the Christian witness by prioritizing political power over spiritual persuasion.
Efforts to mandate school prayer or display the Ten Commandments in public institutions—often framed as “Christian values”—have led to perceptions of exclusion among non-Christians and marginalized groups. In Louisiana, for example, a 2024 law requiring the Ten Commandments in every public school classroom sparked legal challenges and public outcry from Jewish, Muslim, and secular communities who viewed it as a violation of religious neutrality. Rather than inspiring moral clarity, such mandates deepen cultural divides and reinforce the perception that Christianity is being weaponized for political dominance.
More broadly, the rise of white Christian Nationalism has been linked to policies and rhetoric that marginalize immigrants, religious minorities, and non-Christian communities. These initiatives, often justified as moral restoration, ignore the pluralistic nature of American society and send a message of exclusion. Instead of fostering unity, they entrench division and distort the gospel’s invitation to grace.
Christian Nationalist rhetoric has also fueled book bans and curriculum restrictions in states like Florida and Texas, targeting texts that explore racial justice and religious diversity. Books by authors of color and religious minorities have been removed under the guise of protecting “Christian morality,” silencing marginalized voices and erasing historical nuance. These actions betray the gospel’s call to love our neighbors (Matthew 22:39) and make Christianity appear coercive rather than compassionate.
Force Does not Equal the Great Commission
The cumulative effect of these policies is not revival. The gospel is distorted when it is legislated rather than lived. True patriotism, shaped by Scripture, prioritizes humble service and faithful witness, not the fusion of church and state that history warns against. As Jesus declared, “My kingdom is not of this world” (John 18:36). When Christians forget this, they risk building earthly empires that obscure the eternal one.
Christian Nationalism, as articulated in Article II, confuses allegiance to Christ with allegiance to a nation. It seeks to sanctify the state rather than disciple its people. But Scripture calls us to something far more radical and redemptive.
Patriotism, rightly ordered, is a form of gratitude, a love for one’s country expressed through service, justice, and humility. It honors the good, laments the broken, and seeks the welfare of the city (Jeremiah 29:7). It does not demand theological conformity from the state but encourages moral clarity from the church. Patriotism can coexist with gospel witness; nationalism cannot.
Nationalism, by contrast, elevates the nation to a sacred status. It demands uniformity, enforces doctrine, and often weaponizes faith for political ends. It replaces the Spirit’s work with legal compulsion, turning the gospel from invitation to imposition. It forgets that Christ’s kingdom is not of this world (John 18:36), and that the church’s mission is not to conquer nations, but to call them.
The Great Commission (Matthew 28:19–20) is not a blueprint for national creeds; it is a call to personal discipleship. Jesus commands us to go, teach, and baptize, not legislate, mandate, or coerce. The early church understood this. Under Roman rule, they preached Christ. They built communities of grace.
Let us reject the temptation to fuse faith with power. Let us embrace the gospel’s true power: the Spirit’s conviction, the church’s witness, and the Savior’s love. In doing so, we honor Christ, not by making nations Christian, but by making disciples in every nation.
Examining the Men Who Support This
As a parting note, I believe it is important to expose the men who push these falsehoods. The Statement on Christian Nationalism & the Gospel employs the rhetoric used by two of its editors, Joel Webbon and William Wolfe, as well as contributors to the Stone Choir and Hard Men podcasts. These men have publicly described modern women—especially those who embrace mainstream cultural norms—as “NPCs,” or non-playable characters. The term, borrowed from video game culture, implies that these women lack agency, depth, or moral significance.
This is not satire. It’s spiritual malpractice.
To reduce women—image-bearers of God—to lifeless caricatures is not only cruel, it’s heretical. Scripture affirms that both male and female are created in the Imago Dei (Genesis 1:27), endowed with dignity, reason, and moral responsibility. To mock women as NPCs is to deny the very breath of God in them. It is to speak with the tongue of the serpent, not the voice of the Shepherd!
These men claim to champion biblical masculinity, yet their fruit reveals something else: pride, contempt, and a hunger for dominance. They do not speak with the wisdom from above, which is “pure, peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy and good fruits” (James 3:17). Instead, they speak with the arrogance of those who mistake cultural rebellion for spiritual revival.
Let us be clear: they do not know the heart of God, nor do they understand His will. If they did, they would tremble at the thought of mocking the daughters of Zion. They would repent of using theology as a weapon to belittle, rather than a balm to heal. They would remember that Christ dignified women—whether the Samaritan at the well, or Mary who sat at His feet.
This rhetoric ruins witness. It drives away seekers. It poisons the church. It must be called out with prophetic clarity, rather than bitterness.
The gospel is not served by mockery. It is not advanced through dehumanization. It is not glorified when men, claiming to speak for Christ, belittle women by calling them ‘NPCs’, implying that the daughters of Eve are mere background noise in the story of redemption. This rhetoric is not just crude; it is spiritually bankrupt. It reveals a heart untouched by grace and a mind unrenewed by the Word.
Call On Our Leaders to Speak Out
The time for silence is over.
Pastors, elders, ministry leaders—if you shepherd the flock of God, then you must speak. If you preach Christ crucified, then you must reject this distortion of His image. If you claim to uphold biblical authority, then you must confront this false masculinity that parades as holiness while sowing contempt.
We call on every faithful church, every small group, every seminary and discipleship community to stand up and speak out. With resolve, not rage, I will shine light. The world is watching. And when the church tolerates cruelty in the name of conviction, it forfeits its prophetic voice.
Let us be clear: this is not about political alignment. It is about spiritual integrity. It is about protecting the witness of Christ from those who would hijack it for cultural warfare. It is about defending the dignity of every person made in God’s image—especially those targeted by this rhetoric.
So let the pulpits thunder. Let the blogs and newsletters and podcasts ring with truth. Let the church be known not for its silence, but for its courage. Because when we speak with conviction and compassion, we do not just rebuke error, we reclaim the gospel.
Leave a comment